Blogging through and answering the questions from G. I. Williamson's The Westminster Confession of Faith for Study Classes for personal review and comprehension.
Prior posts for WCF. I. Of the Holy Scriptures - Sections 1-10.
Prior posts for WCF. II. Of God, And of the Holy Trinity - Sections 1-3.
Prior posts for WCF. III.
III. Of God's Eternal Decree - 1-2.
III. Of God's Eternal Decree - 3-5.
III. Of God's Eternal Decree - 6.
WCF. III. Of God's Eternal Decree - 7-8.
1. Precisely what has God determined to do with respect to the reprobate?
With respect to the reprobate, God has sovereignly determined to withhold his grace from some men, and this God does according to his perfect counsel.
2. Why has God passed by these particular persons?
God passes by the reprobate according to his good pleasure (see Romans 9:18 and Ephesians 1:5).
3. Why do they receive damnation?
The reason the reprobate receive damnation is wholly within God. i.e., the reason is known by the triune God - "God elects or passes by as, and because, it pleases him" (38). The reprobate are not passed over by God because of their sin; that cannot be the reason because "all have sinned" (Romans 3:23). However, the reprobate receive damnation because they have been left in their sin, which in the end brings upon them God's perfect and holy wrath.
4. How has this doctrine been abused?
This doctrine has been abused by those who say, "If God passes over the reprobate, then that means it is God's fault they receive punishment." G. I. Williamson says, "This [the abuse just mentioned] is diabolical for the simple reason that God's withholding of grace does not make the sinner guilty and liable to punishment; it merely leaves him in that condition. "The wrath of God abideth (i.e., remains) on him" (John 3:36)" (39).
5. Why has this doctrine been refused?
This doctrine is refused by those who say, "If God does this, then God is arbitrary, unfair/unjust, and unkind.
6. Is God "arbitrary" in his actions?
Yes. God is arbitrary, however, God is not unjust. Romans 9:18 - "Therefore hath he mercy on whom he will have mercy, and whom he will he hardeneth."
7. Is it wrong for God to be "arbitrary" in his actions?
No. He is God. God's decree determines what will be, and their is nothing higher than the will of the triune God. In his answers to the questions at the back of the book, G. I. Williamson says, "He has absolute right to do as he will with creatures he has made, especially in view of their sin" (275).
8. What text in Scripture shows that reprobation (God's withholding of grace, and passing by) does not make a sinner guilty and liable to punishment?
John 3:36 - "He that believeth on the Son hath everlasting life: and he that believeth not the Son shall not see life; but the wrath of God abideth on him."
"God's sovereign discrimination concerns those who are already under his wrath and curse. His discrimination concerns who shall not be left in that condition" (275). This is declared by the Prophet Habakkuk: "O Lord, I have heard thy speech, and was afraid: O Lord, revive thy work in the midst of the years, in the midst of the years make known; in wrath remember mercy" (Habakkuk 3:2). This fact, that "in wrath remember mercy", is at back of the salvation of every Christian.
9. Should this doctrine be taught? Why? How?
Yes, Yes, three times I say, Yes. It should be taught to counter false presumption. It should be taught in a manner that spurs on diligence to our faithful-and-loving triune God; it should be taught in a manner that engenders humility before our merciful triune God.
Showing posts sorted by relevance for query G.I. Williamson. Sort by date Show all posts
Showing posts sorted by relevance for query G.I. Williamson. Sort by date Show all posts
Tuesday, November 5, 2013
Tuesday, December 30, 2014
Excellent Interview with G.I. Williamson
What a great interview with G.I. Williamson. GIW is the author of The Westminster Confession of Faith: A Study Guide, which I have been blogging through as time allows.
GIW has 'been around the block,' he's been an ordained minister for over 60 years. Below is an excerpt/question from the interview... I love GIW's pastoral insight and answer.
If Genesis 1-2 is not literal, i.e., creation in six days, Adam/Eve created with original righteousness/holiness, all that was created was "very good", etc., then what compels someone to interpret "the fall" as literal? or God's great rescue plan to save his people from her enemy (the serpent/Satan) and sin?
GIW has 'been around the block,' he's been an ordained minister for over 60 years. Below is an excerpt/question from the interview... I love GIW's pastoral insight and answer.
What advice would you give young men who sense a call to be preachers?
Find a seminary that still believes and teaches the doctrine of six-day creation as stated in the Westminster Confession and Catechisms.What does WCF teach about creation?
Chapter IV
Of Creation
I. It pleased God the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, for the manifestation of the glory of His eternal power, wisdom, and goodness, in the beginning, to create, or make of nothing, the world, and all things therein whether visible or invisible, in the space of six days; and all very good.
II. After God had made all other creatures, He created man, male and female, with reasonable and immortal souls, endued with knowledge, righteousness, and true holiness, after His own image; having the law of God written in their hearts, and power to fulfil it; and yet under a possibility of transgressing, being left to the liberty of their own will, which was subject unto change. Beside this law written in their hearts, they received a command, not to eat of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil; which while they kept, they were happy in their communion with God, and had dominion over the creatures.The doctrine of creation is of paramount importance because what a person believes about creation will determine what they believe about the doctrines of "the fall" and "redemption", as well as an entire array of theological loci.
If Genesis 1-2 is not literal, i.e., creation in six days, Adam/Eve created with original righteousness/holiness, all that was created was "very good", etc., then what compels someone to interpret "the fall" as literal? or God's great rescue plan to save his people from her enemy (the serpent/Satan) and sin?
Tuesday, October 22, 2013
WCF. III. Of God's Eternal Decree - 3-5. Q & A
Blogging through and answering the questions from G. I. Williamson's The Westminster Confession of Faith for Study Classes for personal review and comprehension.
Prior posts for WCF. I. Of the Holy Scriptures - Sections 1-10.
Prior posts for WCF. II. Of God, And of the Holy Trinity - Sections 1-3.
Prior post for III. Of God's Eternal Decree - 1-2.
WCF. III. Of God's Eternal Decree - 3-5.
1. Why is the doctrine of predestination so seldom acknowledged even though it is so clearly taught in Scripture?
The doctrine of predestination is so seldom acknowledged because of the perversity of man. Scripture clearly teaches this doctrine, but it is man who refuses to hear God's word by faith (and with humility). "And the chief cause of man's constant misreading of Scripture regarding this matter is his perennial desire to have a better opinion of himself than is warranted" (33).
2. What does sinful man deserve?
Sinful man deserves wrath and damnation.
3. What classic example in Scripture proves this doctrine [doctrine of predestination]?
The classic example is of Jacob and Esau - Romans 9:11-15 "For the children [Rebecca's children] being not yet born, neither having done any good or evil, that the purpose of God according to election might stand, not of works, but of him that calleth; It was said unto her, The elder shall serve the younger. As it is written, Jacob have I loved, but Esau have I hated. What shall we say then? Is there unrighteousness with God? God forbid. For he saith to Moses, I will have mercy on whom I will have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I will have compassion."
4. How much did they have "in common" to begin with? At the "end"?
According to their nature, they being twins, to begin they had everything in common. In the end, however, they were totally different - "Jacob was chosen to eternal life, and Esau was passed by and left to the punishment he deserved" (33).
5. How does this case prove that it was God (alone) who made them differ?
This case proves that it was God alone who made them differ because Romans 9:18 says, "He [God] hath mercy on whom he will, and whom he will he hardeneth."
6. What Scripture asserts that God has "the right" to do this?
God is the Creator, thus, he has a right over his creation, as Romans 9:21 teaches - "Hath not the potter [God] power over the clay, of the same lump to make one vessel unto honour, and another unto dishonour?." Commenting on this Williamson says, "God has a right to give damnation to Esau, who deserves damnation, and eternal life to Jacob, who also deserves damnation" (33).
7. What is meant by saying that God's predestination is not "conditional"?
Williamson says, "But what is of cardinal importance is to recognize that God's sovereign determination of the destinies of the souls of men is not conditional. There is no difference between Jacob and Esau for the sake of which God chose the one and rejected the other" (33). God's predestination of man is wholly of grace. God's predestination of man is not conditioned by the works of man.
8. If man could fulfill some condition upon which basis God would then elect him, what teachings of Scripture would be denied?
If man could fulfill some condition upon which basis God would then elect him, it would deny what Scripture teaches in Ephesians 2:8-9 - "For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God: Not of works, lest any man should boast." - and in Romans 11:6 - "And if by grace, then is it no more of works: otherwise grace is no more grace. But if it be of works, then is it no more grace: otherwise work is no more work."
9. Why has God chosen the ones he has chosen?
God has chosen the ones he has chosen because of grace, that is, because of pure, unmerited favor. Ephesians 2:5-6 "Even when we were dead in sins, hath quickened us together with Christ, (by grace ye are saved;) And hath raised us up together, and made us sit together in heavenly places in Christ Jesus." Williamson says, "Scripture informs us that divine election is conditioned upon not something in the creature but rather something in God. It is the good pleasure, the delight of God, which is the basis of Election" (34). See Luke 10:21 - "In that hour Jesus rejoiced in spirit, and said, I thank thee, O Father, Lord of heaven and earth, that thou hast hid these things from the wise and prudent, and hast revealed them unto babes: even so, Father; for so it seemed good in thy sight."
10. Why has God chosen some and passed others by?
Why did God do this? This God has done for his own glory. "God will bring glory to himself, or rather will manifest his glory. He will display the perfection of his holiness by wrath against sin in the destruction of the wicked and he will display the perfection of his mercy and love in saving the elect" (34). If what we stated earlier is true, that "Sinful man deserves wrath and damnation," then it is obvious that both the perfection of God's holy justice and the perfection of God's merciful grace manifest his glory.
Prior posts for WCF. I. Of the Holy Scriptures - Sections 1-10.
Prior posts for WCF. II. Of God, And of the Holy Trinity - Sections 1-3.
Prior post for III. Of God's Eternal Decree - 1-2.
WCF. III. Of God's Eternal Decree - 3-5.
1. Why is the doctrine of predestination so seldom acknowledged even though it is so clearly taught in Scripture?
The doctrine of predestination is so seldom acknowledged because of the perversity of man. Scripture clearly teaches this doctrine, but it is man who refuses to hear God's word by faith (and with humility). "And the chief cause of man's constant misreading of Scripture regarding this matter is his perennial desire to have a better opinion of himself than is warranted" (33).
2. What does sinful man deserve?
Sinful man deserves wrath and damnation.
3. What classic example in Scripture proves this doctrine [doctrine of predestination]?
The classic example is of Jacob and Esau - Romans 9:11-15 "For the children [Rebecca's children] being not yet born, neither having done any good or evil, that the purpose of God according to election might stand, not of works, but of him that calleth; It was said unto her, The elder shall serve the younger. As it is written, Jacob have I loved, but Esau have I hated. What shall we say then? Is there unrighteousness with God? God forbid. For he saith to Moses, I will have mercy on whom I will have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I will have compassion."
4. How much did they have "in common" to begin with? At the "end"?
According to their nature, they being twins, to begin they had everything in common. In the end, however, they were totally different - "Jacob was chosen to eternal life, and Esau was passed by and left to the punishment he deserved" (33).
5. How does this case prove that it was God (alone) who made them differ?
This case proves that it was God alone who made them differ because Romans 9:18 says, "He [God] hath mercy on whom he will, and whom he will he hardeneth."
6. What Scripture asserts that God has "the right" to do this?
God is the Creator, thus, he has a right over his creation, as Romans 9:21 teaches - "Hath not the potter [God] power over the clay, of the same lump to make one vessel unto honour, and another unto dishonour?." Commenting on this Williamson says, "God has a right to give damnation to Esau, who deserves damnation, and eternal life to Jacob, who also deserves damnation" (33).
7. What is meant by saying that God's predestination is not "conditional"?
Williamson says, "But what is of cardinal importance is to recognize that God's sovereign determination of the destinies of the souls of men is not conditional. There is no difference between Jacob and Esau for the sake of which God chose the one and rejected the other" (33). God's predestination of man is wholly of grace. God's predestination of man is not conditioned by the works of man.
8. If man could fulfill some condition upon which basis God would then elect him, what teachings of Scripture would be denied?
If man could fulfill some condition upon which basis God would then elect him, it would deny what Scripture teaches in Ephesians 2:8-9 - "For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God: Not of works, lest any man should boast." - and in Romans 11:6 - "And if by grace, then is it no more of works: otherwise grace is no more grace. But if it be of works, then is it no more grace: otherwise work is no more work."
9. Why has God chosen the ones he has chosen?
God has chosen the ones he has chosen because of grace, that is, because of pure, unmerited favor. Ephesians 2:5-6 "Even when we were dead in sins, hath quickened us together with Christ, (by grace ye are saved;) And hath raised us up together, and made us sit together in heavenly places in Christ Jesus." Williamson says, "Scripture informs us that divine election is conditioned upon not something in the creature but rather something in God. It is the good pleasure, the delight of God, which is the basis of Election" (34). See Luke 10:21 - "In that hour Jesus rejoiced in spirit, and said, I thank thee, O Father, Lord of heaven and earth, that thou hast hid these things from the wise and prudent, and hast revealed them unto babes: even so, Father; for so it seemed good in thy sight."
10. Why has God chosen some and passed others by?
Why did God do this? This God has done for his own glory. "God will bring glory to himself, or rather will manifest his glory. He will display the perfection of his holiness by wrath against sin in the destruction of the wicked and he will display the perfection of his mercy and love in saving the elect" (34). If what we stated earlier is true, that "Sinful man deserves wrath and damnation," then it is obvious that both the perfection of God's holy justice and the perfection of God's merciful grace manifest his glory.
Monday, December 2, 2013
WCF. IV. Of Creation - 2. Q & A
Blogging through and answering the questions from G. I. Williamson's The Westminster Confession of Faith for Study Classes for personal review and comprehension.
Prior posts for WCF. I. Of the Holy Scriptures - Sections 1-10.
Prior posts for WCF. II. Of God, And of the Holy Trinity - Sections 1-3.
Prior posts for WCF. III. Of God's Eternal Decree - Sections 1-8.
Prior post for WCF. IV. Of Creation - Section 1.
WCF. IV. Of Creation - 2.
1. In what do evolutionists and Christians superficially agree?
Generally speaking, both agree that man is the crowning or highest creature on earth.
2. Why do we say this agreement is superficial?
An evolutionist believes that this range of lower to higher forms of creation is all derivative of blind and neutral mechanical forces. A Christian, however, believes God's immediate will and creative word is at back these forms of creation.
3. Is it anti-Christian to believe that God employed many basic structural designs in lower forms of life and then later in creating man?
No. It is not. We may see similar structural designs, but there was no man (human) until God formed him from the dust of the ground and breathed life into him and called him Adam. "But there can be no yielding at one point: man did not "gradually emerge" from the slime, but was created by an immediate divine act in which matter and spirit were fused together and given existence as a living soul" (57).
4. At what precise point must the Christian never yield respecting man's creation?
See answer above for Question 3.
5. Is it possible that man may have developed from lower forms of "semi-human" beings? Why?
Absolutely not. Man's spirit came directly from God. God fused spirit with matter so that man became a "living soul" (Genesis 2:7), that is, human.
6. What does evolutionary dogma say about "early" human existence?
Evolutionary dogma insists man's genesis being one of dim-wits, pertaining to the caveman variety. This is bogus. Man from the beginning, according to Scripture, was endowed with a highly developed intelligence. For example, evolutionists believe speech is a phenomenon of human evolution, but the Bible describes speech as intricate to man being made in the image of God. As A. W. Tozer said, "Thought and speech are God's gifts to creatures made in His image; these are intimately associated with Him and impossible apart from Him. It is highly significant that the first word was the Word: 'And the Word was with God, and the Word was God.' We may speak because God spoke" (The Knowledge of the Holy, 2).
7. What does the Bible say about "early" human existence?
See answer above for Question 6, and Romans 2:15 says the work of the law is written in our hearts.
8. In what sense was Adam's knowledge primitive?
Adam's knowledge was primitive in a non-cumulative sense: Adam was created with genuine knowledge, albeit, knowledge that was not composite, i.e., Adam didn't know about the latest theories of quantum-physics, about the ocean's tides, etc.
9. Why do scientists believe in the unity of the human race?
Scientists believe in the unity of the human race because they believe man descended from an original pair (I don't know of any scientists who maintain that human-evolution occurred in-parallel and simultaneously in different geographic regions).
10. Why do Christians believe in the unity of the human race?
Christians believe in the unity of the human race because of God's revelation: Acts 17:26 And hath made of one blood all nations of men for to dwell on all the face of the earth, and hath determined the times before appointed, and the bounds of their habitation. Referencing this truth, Williamson says, "And the Christian resists all racist pride, not on the basis of the evolutionary dogma of man's greatness, but the biblical doctrine of creation and the fall" (58).
11. Which is correct: the soul is the image of God, the soul contains the image of God, man has the image of God, or man is the image of God?
The correct formulation is "Man is the image of God." Williamson says, "It would seem to be more scriptural to simply affirm that man (in the totality of his physical-scriptural being) is (rather than merely contains) the image of God" (58).
12. Why may it be that the body has traditionally been excluded from the image?
Williamson thinks this may be the case because of "pagan holdovers" where the body (physical) is considered evil and the spirit (non-physical) is considered good.
13. If God is triune, and man is God's image, then what must we see in the unity of human personality?
In human personality we see "endowed capacity for knowledge, holiness, and righteousness" (59), that is, we see diversity. "Man has one personality, but various faculties - mind, heart, and will" (357). These three traits correspond to functions as a prophet, priest, and king. Adam was created in the image of the Triune God and was to function and fulfill duties of each of these offices: "As a prophet man was endowed with the physical sense and mental ability to learn the truth. As a priest he possessed the sensibility and desire to worship God in true holiness. And as a king he possessed the physical and mental power and ability to subject in righteousness all things to the purpose and will of God" (59).
14. Do you find Scripture evidence for this diversity?
"Yes, the Scriptures teach that man is a rational, emotional, volitional personality (Isa. 1:18; Acts 24:25; Col. 3:9-10; Rom. 12:10; Matt. 26:39; John 1:13)" (357).
Prior posts for WCF. I. Of the Holy Scriptures - Sections 1-10.
Prior posts for WCF. II. Of God, And of the Holy Trinity - Sections 1-3.
Prior posts for WCF. III. Of God's Eternal Decree - Sections 1-8.
Prior post for WCF. IV. Of Creation - Section 1.
WCF. IV. Of Creation - 2.
1. In what do evolutionists and Christians superficially agree?
Generally speaking, both agree that man is the crowning or highest creature on earth.
2. Why do we say this agreement is superficial?
An evolutionist believes that this range of lower to higher forms of creation is all derivative of blind and neutral mechanical forces. A Christian, however, believes God's immediate will and creative word is at back these forms of creation.
3. Is it anti-Christian to believe that God employed many basic structural designs in lower forms of life and then later in creating man?
No. It is not. We may see similar structural designs, but there was no man (human) until God formed him from the dust of the ground and breathed life into him and called him Adam. "But there can be no yielding at one point: man did not "gradually emerge" from the slime, but was created by an immediate divine act in which matter and spirit were fused together and given existence as a living soul" (57).
4. At what precise point must the Christian never yield respecting man's creation?
See answer above for Question 3.
5. Is it possible that man may have developed from lower forms of "semi-human" beings? Why?
Absolutely not. Man's spirit came directly from God. God fused spirit with matter so that man became a "living soul" (Genesis 2:7), that is, human.
6. What does evolutionary dogma say about "early" human existence?
Evolutionary dogma insists man's genesis being one of dim-wits, pertaining to the caveman variety. This is bogus. Man from the beginning, according to Scripture, was endowed with a highly developed intelligence. For example, evolutionists believe speech is a phenomenon of human evolution, but the Bible describes speech as intricate to man being made in the image of God. As A. W. Tozer said, "Thought and speech are God's gifts to creatures made in His image; these are intimately associated with Him and impossible apart from Him. It is highly significant that the first word was the Word: 'And the Word was with God, and the Word was God.' We may speak because God spoke" (The Knowledge of the Holy, 2).
7. What does the Bible say about "early" human existence?
See answer above for Question 6, and Romans 2:15 says the work of the law is written in our hearts.
8. In what sense was Adam's knowledge primitive?
Adam's knowledge was primitive in a non-cumulative sense: Adam was created with genuine knowledge, albeit, knowledge that was not composite, i.e., Adam didn't know about the latest theories of quantum-physics, about the ocean's tides, etc.
9. Why do scientists believe in the unity of the human race?
Scientists believe in the unity of the human race because they believe man descended from an original pair (I don't know of any scientists who maintain that human-evolution occurred in-parallel and simultaneously in different geographic regions).
10. Why do Christians believe in the unity of the human race?
Christians believe in the unity of the human race because of God's revelation: Acts 17:26 And hath made of one blood all nations of men for to dwell on all the face of the earth, and hath determined the times before appointed, and the bounds of their habitation. Referencing this truth, Williamson says, "And the Christian resists all racist pride, not on the basis of the evolutionary dogma of man's greatness, but the biblical doctrine of creation and the fall" (58).
11. Which is correct: the soul is the image of God, the soul contains the image of God, man has the image of God, or man is the image of God?
The correct formulation is "Man is the image of God." Williamson says, "It would seem to be more scriptural to simply affirm that man (in the totality of his physical-scriptural being) is (rather than merely contains) the image of God" (58).
12. Why may it be that the body has traditionally been excluded from the image?
Williamson thinks this may be the case because of "pagan holdovers" where the body (physical) is considered evil and the spirit (non-physical) is considered good.
13. If God is triune, and man is God's image, then what must we see in the unity of human personality?
In human personality we see "endowed capacity for knowledge, holiness, and righteousness" (59), that is, we see diversity. "Man has one personality, but various faculties - mind, heart, and will" (357). These three traits correspond to functions as a prophet, priest, and king. Adam was created in the image of the Triune God and was to function and fulfill duties of each of these offices: "As a prophet man was endowed with the physical sense and mental ability to learn the truth. As a priest he possessed the sensibility and desire to worship God in true holiness. And as a king he possessed the physical and mental power and ability to subject in righteousness all things to the purpose and will of God" (59).
14. Do you find Scripture evidence for this diversity?
"Yes, the Scriptures teach that man is a rational, emotional, volitional personality (Isa. 1:18; Acts 24:25; Col. 3:9-10; Rom. 12:10; Matt. 26:39; John 1:13)" (357).
Friday, October 11, 2013
WCF. II. Of God, And of the Holy Trinity - 3. Q & A
Blogging through and answering the questions from G. I. Williamson's The Westminster Confession of Faith for Study Classes for personal review and comprehension.
Prior posts for WCF. I. Of the Holy Scriptures - Sections 1-10.
Prior post for WCF. II. Of God, And of the Holy Trinity:
WCF. II. Of God, And of the Holy Trinity - 1-2.
WCF. II. Of God, And of the Holy Trinity - 3.
1. Is the doctrine of the Trinity revealed in the Old Testament? In the New Testament?
Yes. God reveals himself through events recorded in Scripture. The Old Testament recorded events which prepared man for the (redemptive-historical) events by which God clearly revealed himself as triune, while the New Testament records events in light of this revelation. Williamson says, "God revealed himself by supernatural deeds, along with which gradually gave more and more verbal interpretation. Only as God's plan of redemption was fully worked out, was God himself fully made known" (26-27).
2. Is the God revealed in the Old Testament the triune God? How can this be proved?
Yes. The God revealed in the Old Testament is fully God, and, therefore, triune, although this was not fully evident until the latter revelation came (provided by the New Testament). It is called the Old Testament because it is the older (partial) revelation. Neither the Old or the New Testaments alone are God's full revelation, rather, the two together is God's full revelation which reveals by way of redemptive-historical deeds who God is, and His plan of redemption for man, etc. With the revelation provided by the New Testament, it is clear that the triune God is revealed in the Old Testament. For example, in Genesis 1:26 and 11:5, 7 we see God's self-reference to a plurality in the Godhead (fashioning man "in our image" and "Let us go down") . . . Williamson says there is scriptural data (like the tests just mentioned) which are "inexplicable by any other interpretation than by a trinitarian interpretation" (273).
3. Cite an Old Testament text to prove that God is not a single person.
Genesis 1:26. "And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness . . ."
Genesis 32:24-30. "And Jacob was left alone; and there wrestled a man with him . . . . And Jacob called the name of the place Peniel: for I have seen God face to face, and my life is preserved."
Exodus 23:20-25. "Behold, I send an Angel before thee, to keep thee in the way, and to bring thee into the place which I have prepared. Beware of him, and obey his voice, provoke him not; for he will not pardon your transgressions: for my name is in him. But if thou shalt indeed obey his voice, and do all that I speak; then I will be an enemy unto thine enemies, and an adversary unto thine adversaries. For mine Angel shall go before thee, and bring thee in unto the Amorites, and the Hittites, and the Perizzites, and the Canaanites, the Hivites, and the Jebusites: and I will cut them off. Thou shalt not bow down to their gods, nor serve them, nor do after their works: but thou shalt utterly overthrow them, and quite break down their images. And ye shall serve the LORD your God, and he shall bless thy bread, and thy water; and I will take sickness away from the midst of thee"
4. Cite a text which indicates that the Angel of Jehovah is Jehovah (God).
Exodus 23:20, 21 (see above).
5. Cite a prophetic text which will show that God promised to send God incarnate.
The Immanuel ("God with us") promised in Isaiah 7:14 is called "mighty God" in Isaiah 9:6.
6. Why did the apostles accept the "doctrine" of the Trinity?
The accepted the doctrine of the Trinity because each of the Person's of the Godhead had revealed themselves through specific deeds which confirmed they were distinct but together united (one).
7. What two essential elements of the doctrine of the Trinity are taught in the baptismal form of Matthew?
The two elements are: (a) God is one, and (b) God is three. (Three Persons in one being; one being in three Persons.)
Prior posts for WCF. I. Of the Holy Scriptures - Sections 1-10.
Prior post for WCF. II. Of God, And of the Holy Trinity:
WCF. II. Of God, And of the Holy Trinity - 1-2.
WCF. II. Of God, And of the Holy Trinity - 3.
1. Is the doctrine of the Trinity revealed in the Old Testament? In the New Testament?
Yes. God reveals himself through events recorded in Scripture. The Old Testament recorded events which prepared man for the (redemptive-historical) events by which God clearly revealed himself as triune, while the New Testament records events in light of this revelation. Williamson says, "God revealed himself by supernatural deeds, along with which gradually gave more and more verbal interpretation. Only as God's plan of redemption was fully worked out, was God himself fully made known" (26-27).
2. Is the God revealed in the Old Testament the triune God? How can this be proved?
Yes. The God revealed in the Old Testament is fully God, and, therefore, triune, although this was not fully evident until the latter revelation came (provided by the New Testament). It is called the Old Testament because it is the older (partial) revelation. Neither the Old or the New Testaments alone are God's full revelation, rather, the two together is God's full revelation which reveals by way of redemptive-historical deeds who God is, and His plan of redemption for man, etc. With the revelation provided by the New Testament, it is clear that the triune God is revealed in the Old Testament. For example, in Genesis 1:26 and 11:5, 7 we see God's self-reference to a plurality in the Godhead (fashioning man "in our image" and "Let us go down") . . . Williamson says there is scriptural data (like the tests just mentioned) which are "inexplicable by any other interpretation than by a trinitarian interpretation" (273).
3. Cite an Old Testament text to prove that God is not a single person.
Genesis 1:26. "And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness . . ."
Genesis 32:24-30. "And Jacob was left alone; and there wrestled a man with him . . . . And Jacob called the name of the place Peniel: for I have seen God face to face, and my life is preserved."
Exodus 23:20-25. "Behold, I send an Angel before thee, to keep thee in the way, and to bring thee into the place which I have prepared. Beware of him, and obey his voice, provoke him not; for he will not pardon your transgressions: for my name is in him. But if thou shalt indeed obey his voice, and do all that I speak; then I will be an enemy unto thine enemies, and an adversary unto thine adversaries. For mine Angel shall go before thee, and bring thee in unto the Amorites, and the Hittites, and the Perizzites, and the Canaanites, the Hivites, and the Jebusites: and I will cut them off. Thou shalt not bow down to their gods, nor serve them, nor do after their works: but thou shalt utterly overthrow them, and quite break down their images. And ye shall serve the LORD your God, and he shall bless thy bread, and thy water; and I will take sickness away from the midst of thee"
Exodus 23:20, 21 (see above).
5. Cite a prophetic text which will show that God promised to send God incarnate.
The Immanuel ("God with us") promised in Isaiah 7:14 is called "mighty God" in Isaiah 9:6.
6. Why did the apostles accept the "doctrine" of the Trinity?
The accepted the doctrine of the Trinity because each of the Person's of the Godhead had revealed themselves through specific deeds which confirmed they were distinct but together united (one).
7. What two essential elements of the doctrine of the Trinity are taught in the baptismal form of Matthew?
The two elements are: (a) God is one, and (b) God is three. (Three Persons in one being; one being in three Persons.)
Tuesday, August 26, 2014
WCF. VI. Of the Fall of Man, of Sin, and of the Punishment Thereof - 5-6. Q&A
Blogging through and answering the questions from G. I. Williamson's The Westminster Confession of Faith for Study Classes for personal review and comprehension.
Prior posts for WCF. I. Of the Holy Scriptures - Sections 1-10.
Prior posts for WCF. II. Of God, And of the Holy Trinity - Sections 1-3.
Prior posts for WCF. III. Of God's Eternal Decree - Sections 1-8.
Prior posts for WCF. IV. Of Creation - Sections 1-2.
Prior posts for WCF. V. Of Providence - Sections 1-7.
WCF. VI. Of the Fall of Man, of Sin, and of the Punishment Thereof.
Sections 1-2.
Sections 3-4.
Sections 5-6.
1. Is the believer both "the old man" and "the new man"?
No. A believer is not two persons. A believer is only "the new man."
2. Prove this to be correct from Scripture.
Colossians 3:9-10, Lie not one to another, seeing that ye have put off the old man with his deeds; And have put on the new man, which is renewed in knowledge after the image of him that created him. Also, see 2 Corinthians 5:17.
3. What does "perfectionism" teach?
"Perfectionism" teaches on the absence of all sin when a believer becomes a new creation in Christ (or at the least they teach on the absence of all known and/or conscious sin).
4. What does "antinomianism" teach?
"Antinomianism" teaches that a believer may indeed sin, but he will blame-shift and deny responsibility for sinning, claiming it is the influence of the "old man or nature within me," thus denying that Christians ought to stive to be perfect. "Antinomian" literally means anti-law; "antinomianism" demonstrates it is anti-law because it shirks personal responsibility before the Law of God, e.g. The antinomian thinks: It isn't my fault that I just committed this sin! That sin flowed from the old man or nature within me.
5. Give a Scripture reference to refute "perfectionism."
1 John 1:8, If we say that we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us. Also, see 1 John 1:10, James 3:2, Ecclesiastes 7:20, Romans 7:14-25, and Psalm 51.
6. Give a Scripture reference to refute "antinomianism."
"Certain expressions of the apostle Paul may be quoted in what can be made to seem to support this view. He says, for example, "it is no longer I who do it, but sin that dwells in me" (Rom. 7:17). . . . But putting this construction on these statements of Paul is false because it overlooks completely the ways in which Paul "takes the blame" for this situation. "I am carnal," he says (7:14). "For I know that in me (that is, in my flesh) nothing good dwells" (7:18). Paul does not pretend that he can blame his sins on "the old man" a though they were not his. He does indeed inform us that his sins arise from the motions of his old nature as they survive in him. Yet he clearly indicates that he must fight against them and continue doing so until they are wholly destroyed. So the antinomian ends up saying the same thing the perfectionist says: "I have no sin." In this he deceives himself and shows that the truth is not in him. For both the remaining corruption, and all the motions thereof, are truly and properly sin" (78-79).
7. What is the difference between the status of the indwelling sin in the unregenerate man and the regenerate man?
The difference between the status of the indwelling sin in the unregenerate man and the regenerate man hinges upon dominion: the unregenerate man is under the dominion of sin, but the regenerate man is under the dominion of Christ, therefore he is not under the dominion of indwelling sin. "The true state of the case is this: in an unregenerate person corruption rules, but in a regenerate person the Spirit of God and the law of God have dominion (Rom. 8:7-14)" (79).
8. What pernicious error is suggested (and condemned) in Rom. 6:1-2?
The pernicious error suggested and condemned in Romans 6:1-2 is antinomianism, i.e. "the most wicked though of all . . . which suggests that sin is somehow less heinous if it is committed by a Christian." "We might rather," Williamson says, "that sin is much more heinous if it is committed by the Christian" (80). See Romans 6:1-2: What shall we say then? Shall we continue in sin, that grace may abound? God forbid. How shall we that are dead to sin, live any longer therein?
9. Why is sin more heinous in a believer than it is in an unbeliever?
Sin is more heinous in a believe, Williamson says, because there is greater reason for the believer to overcome sin, e.g.:
"Willful sin" is the antinomian practice of sinning--living in sin--because one is not concerned with overcoming sin.
Prior posts for WCF. I. Of the Holy Scriptures - Sections 1-10.
Prior posts for WCF. II. Of God, And of the Holy Trinity - Sections 1-3.
Prior posts for WCF. III. Of God's Eternal Decree - Sections 1-8.
Prior posts for WCF. IV. Of Creation - Sections 1-2.
Prior posts for WCF. V. Of Providence - Sections 1-7.
WCF. VI. Of the Fall of Man, of Sin, and of the Punishment Thereof.
Sections 1-2.
Sections 3-4.
Sections 5-6.
1. Is the believer both "the old man" and "the new man"?
No. A believer is not two persons. A believer is only "the new man."
2. Prove this to be correct from Scripture.
Colossians 3:9-10, Lie not one to another, seeing that ye have put off the old man with his deeds; And have put on the new man, which is renewed in knowledge after the image of him that created him. Also, see 2 Corinthians 5:17.
3. What does "perfectionism" teach?
"Perfectionism" teaches on the absence of all sin when a believer becomes a new creation in Christ (or at the least they teach on the absence of all known and/or conscious sin).
4. What does "antinomianism" teach?
"Antinomianism" teaches that a believer may indeed sin, but he will blame-shift and deny responsibility for sinning, claiming it is the influence of the "old man or nature within me," thus denying that Christians ought to stive to be perfect. "Antinomian" literally means anti-law; "antinomianism" demonstrates it is anti-law because it shirks personal responsibility before the Law of God, e.g. The antinomian thinks: It isn't my fault that I just committed this sin! That sin flowed from the old man or nature within me.
5. Give a Scripture reference to refute "perfectionism."
1 John 1:8, If we say that we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us. Also, see 1 John 1:10, James 3:2, Ecclesiastes 7:20, Romans 7:14-25, and Psalm 51.
6. Give a Scripture reference to refute "antinomianism."
"Certain expressions of the apostle Paul may be quoted in what can be made to seem to support this view. He says, for example, "it is no longer I who do it, but sin that dwells in me" (Rom. 7:17). . . . But putting this construction on these statements of Paul is false because it overlooks completely the ways in which Paul "takes the blame" for this situation. "I am carnal," he says (7:14). "For I know that in me (that is, in my flesh) nothing good dwells" (7:18). Paul does not pretend that he can blame his sins on "the old man" a though they were not his. He does indeed inform us that his sins arise from the motions of his old nature as they survive in him. Yet he clearly indicates that he must fight against them and continue doing so until they are wholly destroyed. So the antinomian ends up saying the same thing the perfectionist says: "I have no sin." In this he deceives himself and shows that the truth is not in him. For both the remaining corruption, and all the motions thereof, are truly and properly sin" (78-79).
7. What is the difference between the status of the indwelling sin in the unregenerate man and the regenerate man?
The difference between the status of the indwelling sin in the unregenerate man and the regenerate man hinges upon dominion: the unregenerate man is under the dominion of sin, but the regenerate man is under the dominion of Christ, therefore he is not under the dominion of indwelling sin. "The true state of the case is this: in an unregenerate person corruption rules, but in a regenerate person the Spirit of God and the law of God have dominion (Rom. 8:7-14)" (79).
8. What pernicious error is suggested (and condemned) in Rom. 6:1-2?
The pernicious error suggested and condemned in Romans 6:1-2 is antinomianism, i.e. "the most wicked though of all . . . which suggests that sin is somehow less heinous if it is committed by a Christian." "We might rather," Williamson says, "that sin is much more heinous if it is committed by the Christian" (80). See Romans 6:1-2: What shall we say then? Shall we continue in sin, that grace may abound? God forbid. How shall we that are dead to sin, live any longer therein?
9. Why is sin more heinous in a believer than it is in an unbeliever?
Sin is more heinous in a believe, Williamson says, because there is greater reason for the believer to overcome sin, e.g.:
- A Christian has strength that the non-Christian does not have;
- A Christian has knowledge that the unbeliever lacks;
- A Christian, most of all, has the realization of the terrible consequences of sin because he has seen what it cost the Saviour to blot them out.
"Willful sin" is the antinomian practice of sinning--living in sin--because one is not concerned with overcoming sin.
Monday, September 30, 2013
WCF. II. Of God, And of the Holy Trinity - 1-2. Q & A
Blogging through and answering the questions from G. I. Williamson's The Westminster Confession of Faith for Study Classes for personal review and comprehension.
Prior posts for WCF. I. Of the Holy Scriptures - Sections 1-10.
WCF. II. Of God, And of the Holy Trinity - 1-2.
1. Where is the proof to be found of the true God's existence?
Hebrews 11:6 says, "He that cometh to God must believe that he is, and that he is a rewarder of them that diligently seek him." Thus, Williamson says, "The doctrine of God begins, therefore, with the assertion that God is. And to the truth of this assertion (as Scripture informs us) everything testifies" (23).
2. What do we mean when we call God a "Spirit"?
God is pure Spirit, meaning he does not have a body like men.
3. Why does Scripture speak of God as having hands, feet, etc.?
In such instances, Scripture is speaking metaphorically and/or (oftentimes) synecdochically.
4. What is meant by the term "incommunicable"?
This term is used to describe the attributes of God that are not and cannot be communicated to man (image bearer of God).
5. What is meant by the term "attributes"?
"Attribute" in reference to the Divine denotes those qualities belonging to God.
6. What are the incommunicable attributes of God?
The incommunicable attributes of God are: eternity, infinity, immutability. God alone has these attributes.
7. What is meant by the term "communicable"?
The term is used to describe the attributes of God that are and can be communicated to man (image bearer of God).
8. What are some communicable attributes of God?
God has qualities that he bestows ("in a measure") upon creatures, i.e., the sevenfold list: being, wisdom, power, holiness, justice, goodness, and truth.
9. Does our knowledge of a particular fact or truth (for example) have the same qualities as does God's knowledge of that fact or truth?
No. God's knowledge of a particular fact or truth is eternal, infinite, and immutable knowledge. That is to say, God's knowledge of a particular fact or truth is Divine knowledge. Our knowledge is not Divine knowledge. We are creatures. Therefore, we have creaturely knowledge. Creaturely knowledge is finite; it does not have the same qualities as does God's knowledge.
10. What does God receive?
God receives nothing because His Divine knowledge is eternal, infinite, and immutable. All that we give to God is merely a re-interpretation (reflection) of his Divine knowledge.
11. What simple truth of the doctrine of God is seldom consistently maintained in the thinking of (even Christian) men?
The simple truth of the doctrine of God that is seldom consistently maintained is that all is derivative of God, meaning, "God is the great original. Everything else is, in one way or another, a mere reflection of him" (25). Everything else is analogically related to the doctrine of the knowledge of God.
Prior posts for WCF. I. Of the Holy Scriptures - Sections 1-10.
WCF. II. Of God, And of the Holy Trinity - 1-2.
1. Where is the proof to be found of the true God's existence?
Hebrews 11:6 says, "He that cometh to God must believe that he is, and that he is a rewarder of them that diligently seek him." Thus, Williamson says, "The doctrine of God begins, therefore, with the assertion that God is. And to the truth of this assertion (as Scripture informs us) everything testifies" (23).
2. What do we mean when we call God a "Spirit"?
God is pure Spirit, meaning he does not have a body like men.
3. Why does Scripture speak of God as having hands, feet, etc.?
In such instances, Scripture is speaking metaphorically and/or (oftentimes) synecdochically.
4. What is meant by the term "incommunicable"?
This term is used to describe the attributes of God that are not and cannot be communicated to man (image bearer of God).
5. What is meant by the term "attributes"?
"Attribute" in reference to the Divine denotes those qualities belonging to God.
6. What are the incommunicable attributes of God?
The incommunicable attributes of God are: eternity, infinity, immutability. God alone has these attributes.
7. What is meant by the term "communicable"?
The term is used to describe the attributes of God that are and can be communicated to man (image bearer of God).
8. What are some communicable attributes of God?
God has qualities that he bestows ("in a measure") upon creatures, i.e., the sevenfold list: being, wisdom, power, holiness, justice, goodness, and truth.
9. Does our knowledge of a particular fact or truth (for example) have the same qualities as does God's knowledge of that fact or truth?
No. God's knowledge of a particular fact or truth is eternal, infinite, and immutable knowledge. That is to say, God's knowledge of a particular fact or truth is Divine knowledge. Our knowledge is not Divine knowledge. We are creatures. Therefore, we have creaturely knowledge. Creaturely knowledge is finite; it does not have the same qualities as does God's knowledge.
10. What does God receive?
God receives nothing because His Divine knowledge is eternal, infinite, and immutable. All that we give to God is merely a re-interpretation (reflection) of his Divine knowledge.
11. What simple truth of the doctrine of God is seldom consistently maintained in the thinking of (even Christian) men?
The simple truth of the doctrine of God that is seldom consistently maintained is that all is derivative of God, meaning, "God is the great original. Everything else is, in one way or another, a mere reflection of him" (25). Everything else is analogically related to the doctrine of the knowledge of God.
Tuesday, September 2, 2014
WCF. VII. Of God's Covenant with Man - 1. Q & A
Blogging through and answering the questions from G. I. Williamson's The Westminster Confession of Faith for Study Classes for personal review and comprehension.
Prior posts for WCF. I. Of the Holy Scriptures - Sections 1-10.
Prior posts for WCF. II. Of God, And of the Holy Trinity - Sections 1-3.
Prior posts for WCF. III. Of God's Eternal Decree - Sections 1-8.
Prior posts for WCF. IV. Of Creation - Sections 1-2.
Prior posts for WCF. V. Of Providence - Sections 1-7.
Prior posts for WCF. VI. Of the Fall of Man, of Sin, and of the Punishment Thereof - Sections 1-6.
WCF. VII. Of God's Covenant with Man.
Section 1.
1. What does the depraved sinner deny besides the fact that he is depraved?
In addition to deny his depravity, the depraved sinner denies his creaturehood. Depraved man is bewitched by self-delusions of autonomy and independence from God (the Creator).
2. Have Reformed Christians failed to consistently acknowledge "the distance between God and the creature?"
Yes, some Reformed Christians have failed to consistently acknowledge the basic distinction between the Creator and the creation.
3. How have they done so?
They have done so by when by describing a covenant as "an agreement between two or more persons." Williamson says, "There is, in such language, at least the danger of suggesting that God and man are equal parties in the disposition of the covenants--as if each agreed to terms sovereignly imposed by the other!" (82)
4. What would God have owed a sinlessly perfect, or perfectly obedient, man?
God would have owed (God owes) only the gracious promises he has self-imposed by way of covenant.
5. By what is God "bound" in his covenant(s)?
Because "God's covenant dealings with men are both sovereign and gracious" . . . "He is bound by nothing but his own holy Word" (82).
6. By whom is a covenant instituted?
A covenant is sovereignly and graciously instituted by God; a covenant is instituted by the will of God alone.
Prior posts for WCF. I. Of the Holy Scriptures - Sections 1-10.
Prior posts for WCF. II. Of God, And of the Holy Trinity - Sections 1-3.
Prior posts for WCF. III. Of God's Eternal Decree - Sections 1-8.
Prior posts for WCF. IV. Of Creation - Sections 1-2.
Prior posts for WCF. V. Of Providence - Sections 1-7.
Prior posts for WCF. VI. Of the Fall of Man, of Sin, and of the Punishment Thereof - Sections 1-6.
WCF. VII. Of God's Covenant with Man.
Section 1.
1. What does the depraved sinner deny besides the fact that he is depraved?
In addition to deny his depravity, the depraved sinner denies his creaturehood. Depraved man is bewitched by self-delusions of autonomy and independence from God (the Creator).
2. Have Reformed Christians failed to consistently acknowledge "the distance between God and the creature?"
Yes, some Reformed Christians have failed to consistently acknowledge the basic distinction between the Creator and the creation.
3. How have they done so?
They have done so by when by describing a covenant as "an agreement between two or more persons." Williamson says, "There is, in such language, at least the danger of suggesting that God and man are equal parties in the disposition of the covenants--as if each agreed to terms sovereignly imposed by the other!" (82)
4. What would God have owed a sinlessly perfect, or perfectly obedient, man?
God would have owed (God owes) only the gracious promises he has self-imposed by way of covenant.
5. By what is God "bound" in his covenant(s)?
Because "God's covenant dealings with men are both sovereign and gracious" . . . "He is bound by nothing but his own holy Word" (82).
6. By whom is a covenant instituted?
A covenant is sovereignly and graciously instituted by God; a covenant is instituted by the will of God alone.
Monday, November 18, 2013
WCF. IV. Of Creation - 1. Q & A
Blogging through and answering the questions from G. I. Williamson's The Westminster Confession of Faith for Study Classes for personal review and comprehension.
Prior posts for WCF. I. Of the Holy Scriptures - Sections 1-10.
Prior posts for WCF. II. Of God, And of the Holy Trinity - Sections 1-3.
Prior posts for WCF. III. Of God's Eternal Decree - Sections 1-8.
WCF. IV. Of Creation - 1.
1. Who created the world?
The true God created the world - the world derives its existence from the Triune Lord. According to Genesis 1:1, "The world is created, not self-existent, and it is God, the true God, who caused it to be" (53).
2. What are the basic points of dogma held by "modern science"?
Modern science teaches the world is "self-existent or eternal . . . that it does not have a derived existence . . . that the present form of the world is the result of a process of selection controlled, not by God, but by the 'principle' of 'the survival of the fittest' . . . that there is no 'ultimate' reason for it" (53). This also was axiom at back Greek-pagan-thought. Heraclitus (c. 500 B.C.) was a Greek philosopher, and, regarding reality, he said, "Neither has any god nor any human made this cosmos, rather it always was and is and will be" (frag. 30). Also, Heraclitus was admired by Cynics, Stoics, and, of course, Nietzsche (see Archetypes of Wisdom: An Introduction to Philosophy, 64).
3. Is there any proof for the theory of evolution? Why?
Williamson calls evolution a "theory" and a "dogma" that has been believed and accepted for over a century, but "there is still not one iota of "proof" that it is true" [italics original] (54). There can be no "proof" for the theory of evolution because . . . see answer below for Question 4.
4. What is truth?
"Truth is simply that which really is. There is only one truth, because there is only one reality. Therefore, if the Scriptures are true, they merely tell us what really is (or was, or will yet be). When by investigation men also discover what really is in the world of nature, they simply grasp another aspect of the same total truth" (54).
5. Where is truth found?
Truth is found in the "book of life" (the Bible) and the "book of nature" - both have been authored by God.
6. What are some common false assumptions of those who accept modern scientific dogma?
That modern science can deduce truth from observing only the "book of nature". Truth is what really is . . . thus, you cannot deduce truth from the raw facts of nature alone. Truth involves both the thing and God's revelation (God's Word) regarding the thing. In addition to this, there are any number of false assumptions related to production of fossils, assumptions regarding vast stretches of time (i.e., "billions-and-billions-of-years-ago"), etc.
7. State concisely your reply to each of these false assumptions.
I prefer not to. If you address the epistemological presuppositions at back false assumptions, then you don't need to address each of the false assumptions.
8. What is your view of the "days" of Genesis 1?
These are 24-hour periods of time. I believe Genesis 1 is a historical narrative of a one-week-sequence of time.
9. Is the Hebrew term for "day" always used to denote a twenty-four hour period?
No, it is not. As any Lexicon will show.
10. Is there any good reason not to believe that God created the world in six twenty-four hour days? if so, state them.
No - there are no good reasons. The reasoning is always driven by an insipid-and-mildew Gnosticism, so it de facto cannot be good reasoning for a Christian.
Prior posts for WCF. I. Of the Holy Scriptures - Sections 1-10.
Prior posts for WCF. II. Of God, And of the Holy Trinity - Sections 1-3.
Prior posts for WCF. III. Of God's Eternal Decree - Sections 1-8.
WCF. IV. Of Creation - 1.
1. Who created the world?
The true God created the world - the world derives its existence from the Triune Lord. According to Genesis 1:1, "The world is created, not self-existent, and it is God, the true God, who caused it to be" (53).
2. What are the basic points of dogma held by "modern science"?
Modern science teaches the world is "self-existent or eternal . . . that it does not have a derived existence . . . that the present form of the world is the result of a process of selection controlled, not by God, but by the 'principle' of 'the survival of the fittest' . . . that there is no 'ultimate' reason for it" (53). This also was axiom at back Greek-pagan-thought. Heraclitus (c. 500 B.C.) was a Greek philosopher, and, regarding reality, he said, "Neither has any god nor any human made this cosmos, rather it always was and is and will be" (frag. 30). Also, Heraclitus was admired by Cynics, Stoics, and, of course, Nietzsche (see Archetypes of Wisdom: An Introduction to Philosophy, 64).
3. Is there any proof for the theory of evolution? Why?
Williamson calls evolution a "theory" and a "dogma" that has been believed and accepted for over a century, but "there is still not one iota of "proof" that it is true" [italics original] (54). There can be no "proof" for the theory of evolution because . . . see answer below for Question 4.
4. What is truth?
"Truth is simply that which really is. There is only one truth, because there is only one reality. Therefore, if the Scriptures are true, they merely tell us what really is (or was, or will yet be). When by investigation men also discover what really is in the world of nature, they simply grasp another aspect of the same total truth" (54).
5. Where is truth found?
Truth is found in the "book of life" (the Bible) and the "book of nature" - both have been authored by God.
6. What are some common false assumptions of those who accept modern scientific dogma?
That modern science can deduce truth from observing only the "book of nature". Truth is what really is . . . thus, you cannot deduce truth from the raw facts of nature alone. Truth involves both the thing and God's revelation (God's Word) regarding the thing. In addition to this, there are any number of false assumptions related to production of fossils, assumptions regarding vast stretches of time (i.e., "billions-and-billions-of-years-ago"), etc.
7. State concisely your reply to each of these false assumptions.
I prefer not to. If you address the epistemological presuppositions at back false assumptions, then you don't need to address each of the false assumptions.
8. What is your view of the "days" of Genesis 1?
These are 24-hour periods of time. I believe Genesis 1 is a historical narrative of a one-week-sequence of time.
9. Is the Hebrew term for "day" always used to denote a twenty-four hour period?
No, it is not. As any Lexicon will show.
10. Is there any good reason not to believe that God created the world in six twenty-four hour days? if so, state them.
No - there are no good reasons. The reasoning is always driven by an insipid-and-mildew Gnosticism, so it de facto cannot be good reasoning for a Christian.
Monday, September 23, 2013
WCF. I. Of the Holy Scriptures - 8. Q & A
Blogging through and answering the questions from G. I. Williamson's The Westminster Confession of Faith for Study Classes for personal review and comprehension.
Prior posts:
I. Of the Holy Scriptures - 1.
I. Of the Holy Scriptures - 2-5.
I. Of the Holy Scriptures - 6.
I. Of the Holy Scriptures - 7.
WCF. I. Of the Holy Scriptures - 8.
1. How many "Bibles" are there (in the ultimate sense)?
In the ultimate sense, there is only one Bible, "given by inspiration of God, to be the rule of faith and life" (WCF. I.2.).
2. Give the correct definition of "the Bible."
It is the original text [the "autographa of the inspired authors" (15)] written by authors under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit.
3. Do we actually possess the original manuscripts upon which the Word of God was originally written?
No. We only have copies (apographa) of the original text. But these copies "actually possess it [the original text] in "authentical" form" (15).
4. What does the Modernist say about the "original, infallible Word of God"?
He says, "What use . . . is an infallible Bible when no one possesses it?" (The Modernist equivocates the original manuscript, which we no longer have, with the original text, which we do have preserved in copies.)
5. Could a copy of the infallible Word of God be as infallible as the Word of which it is a copy? Explain.
Yes. A copy preserves and transmits the truth of the original.
6. Were the early copies perfect?
Some could have been, but they could not all necessarily be perfect because they were copied by uninspired persons. They were copied by hand and men make mistakes.
7. What two chief factors worked to preserve the perfect text even through imperfect copiers?
First, there is a cloud of witnesses (copies). Each copiest made his own mistakes, and the other copies stand as witnesses of both a) the entire text and b) against that copiest's mistakes.
Second, the Greek-speaking Churches that were founded outside of Palestine were familiar with the text and mistakes would have been noticed, this "helped reduce the errors of copiers to an exceedingly small amount" (17).
8. Which of these do you believe most important?
Williamson believes the former is weightier.
9. Why is it no longer necessary that preservation of the true text depend on the Greek-speaking Church?
Because we now have "mechanical means of printing" (17), i.e., printing presses, copy machines, e-publishing, photographs and digital imaging, etc.
10. What is the glorious result of God's singular care and providence so far as Scripture is concerned?
God has by his "care and providence" kept the original text pure through the ages; "We do now actually possess before our very eyes the "authentical" text of the Word of the living God" (17).
Prior posts:
I. Of the Holy Scriptures - 1.
I. Of the Holy Scriptures - 2-5.
I. Of the Holy Scriptures - 6.
I. Of the Holy Scriptures - 7.
WCF. I. Of the Holy Scriptures - 8.
1. How many "Bibles" are there (in the ultimate sense)?
In the ultimate sense, there is only one Bible, "given by inspiration of God, to be the rule of faith and life" (WCF. I.2.).
2. Give the correct definition of "the Bible."
It is the original text [the "autographa of the inspired authors" (15)] written by authors under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit.
3. Do we actually possess the original manuscripts upon which the Word of God was originally written?
No. We only have copies (apographa) of the original text. But these copies "actually possess it [the original text] in "authentical" form" (15).
4. What does the Modernist say about the "original, infallible Word of God"?
He says, "What use . . . is an infallible Bible when no one possesses it?" (The Modernist equivocates the original manuscript, which we no longer have, with the original text, which we do have preserved in copies.)
5. Could a copy of the infallible Word of God be as infallible as the Word of which it is a copy? Explain.
Yes. A copy preserves and transmits the truth of the original.
6. Were the early copies perfect?
Some could have been, but they could not all necessarily be perfect because they were copied by uninspired persons. They were copied by hand and men make mistakes.
7. What two chief factors worked to preserve the perfect text even through imperfect copiers?
First, there is a cloud of witnesses (copies). Each copiest made his own mistakes, and the other copies stand as witnesses of both a) the entire text and b) against that copiest's mistakes.
Second, the Greek-speaking Churches that were founded outside of Palestine were familiar with the text and mistakes would have been noticed, this "helped reduce the errors of copiers to an exceedingly small amount" (17).
8. Which of these do you believe most important?
Williamson believes the former is weightier.
9. Why is it no longer necessary that preservation of the true text depend on the Greek-speaking Church?
Because we now have "mechanical means of printing" (17), i.e., printing presses, copy machines, e-publishing, photographs and digital imaging, etc.
10. What is the glorious result of God's singular care and providence so far as Scripture is concerned?
God has by his "care and providence" kept the original text pure through the ages; "We do now actually possess before our very eyes the "authentical" text of the Word of the living God" (17).
Monday, September 16, 2013
WCF. I. Of the Holy Scriptures - 1. Q & A
G. I. Williamson's The Westminster Confession of Faith for Study Classes is a well known reference on the WCF. Williamson provides a commentary for each of the Confession's chapters with closing questions. I am going to blog through the questions for personal review and comprehension. Let's roll.
WCF. I. Of the Holy Scriptures - 1.
1. How many kinds of revelation are there? Name them.
There are two kinds of revelation: the two kinds of revelation are natural and special.
2. It has been imagined by some that natural revelation spoke clearly to Adam (some even imagined that he needed no word revelation before the fall), but that it does not speak clearly to us. Disprove.
Natural revelation certainly spoke clearly to Adam, however, it was not intended to exist in isolation from special revelation. Special (word) revelation was also present in the Garden (see Genesis 1:28-30; 2:16-17). Natural revelation speaks clearly to us today, but we suppress because of our rebellion (Romans 1:18-20).
3. Is there proof for the existence of God? Where?
Yes. Proof for the existence of God is everywhere: the general creation is proof, man himself is proof, etc.
4. What is wrong with the traditional "proofs" for the existence of God?
The traditional "proofs" for the existence of God merely make God's existence a probability. This is wrong because it makes man's perceptions the measure of all things; this is wrong because it makes man's "perceptions" the base of Epistemology.
5. What are the two aspects of man's nature as "the image of God"?
The two aspects are metaphysical (man's being) and ethical (man's will/purpose).
6. Which of these could man "lose"?
Man was created with freedom - "man is free to do as he will" (2). When Adam freely chose to rebel against God this ethical aspect was lost.
7. Which of these was produced wholly by God?
Man's being was produced wholly by God; man's being is entirely dependent upon God. However, "even in his freedom of will man cannot escape the absolute control of God because the being of man (he is only an image) is wholly dependent upon God. . . . man can only violate, but can never destroy, his dependent relationship to God" (2).
8. Which of these was partly produced by man?
Man's will/purpose is partly produced by man. Because we have been created with free will the "purpose of man is a matter of choice" (2).
9. Was natural revelation alone sufficient before the fall? Why?
Natural revelation was not "alone sufficient before the fall" because the "two forms of revelation are always coordinate" (3). There was no deficiency in God's revelation before the fall because both natural and special revelation were "related to, and designed to operate through, Adam's obedience" (3).
10. What does natural revelation now declare that it did not declare before the fall of man?
It reveals the wrath of God (see Romans 1:18).
11. Does man still exist in the image of God?
Yes. Man still exists in the image of God. In our nature (being) we are image bearers of God. Sin is merely an ethical disease that defiles our natures; sin cannot destroy our nature, it only defiles. "As long as men are men they exist in God's image" (2).
12. What prevents man from having consciousness of the true and living God who hates sin?
We prevent ourselves. The revelation is still there, but in our sin we shrink back and make up lies about reality (Romans 1:20-21).
13. Why must the remedy to man's condition come by special (word) revelation?
Natural and special (word) revelation are "always coordinate" -- this was true under the Covenant of Works made with Adam, as well as under the Covenant of Grace made with the Second Adam -- "But just as the test of man's obedience came by the way of word revelation, so the remedy for man's present need comes by way of word revelation" (3).
WCF. I. Of the Holy Scriptures - 1.
1. How many kinds of revelation are there? Name them.
There are two kinds of revelation: the two kinds of revelation are natural and special.
2. It has been imagined by some that natural revelation spoke clearly to Adam (some even imagined that he needed no word revelation before the fall), but that it does not speak clearly to us. Disprove.
Natural revelation certainly spoke clearly to Adam, however, it was not intended to exist in isolation from special revelation. Special (word) revelation was also present in the Garden (see Genesis 1:28-30; 2:16-17). Natural revelation speaks clearly to us today, but we suppress because of our rebellion (Romans 1:18-20).
3. Is there proof for the existence of God? Where?
Yes. Proof for the existence of God is everywhere: the general creation is proof, man himself is proof, etc.
4. What is wrong with the traditional "proofs" for the existence of God?
The traditional "proofs" for the existence of God merely make God's existence a probability. This is wrong because it makes man's perceptions the measure of all things; this is wrong because it makes man's "perceptions" the base of Epistemology.
5. What are the two aspects of man's nature as "the image of God"?
The two aspects are metaphysical (man's being) and ethical (man's will/purpose).
6. Which of these could man "lose"?
Man was created with freedom - "man is free to do as he will" (2). When Adam freely chose to rebel against God this ethical aspect was lost.
7. Which of these was produced wholly by God?
Man's being was produced wholly by God; man's being is entirely dependent upon God. However, "even in his freedom of will man cannot escape the absolute control of God because the being of man (he is only an image) is wholly dependent upon God. . . . man can only violate, but can never destroy, his dependent relationship to God" (2).
8. Which of these was partly produced by man?
Man's will/purpose is partly produced by man. Because we have been created with free will the "purpose of man is a matter of choice" (2).
9. Was natural revelation alone sufficient before the fall? Why?
Natural revelation was not "alone sufficient before the fall" because the "two forms of revelation are always coordinate" (3). There was no deficiency in God's revelation before the fall because both natural and special revelation were "related to, and designed to operate through, Adam's obedience" (3).
10. What does natural revelation now declare that it did not declare before the fall of man?
It reveals the wrath of God (see Romans 1:18).
11. Does man still exist in the image of God?
Yes. Man still exists in the image of God. In our nature (being) we are image bearers of God. Sin is merely an ethical disease that defiles our natures; sin cannot destroy our nature, it only defiles. "As long as men are men they exist in God's image" (2).
12. What prevents man from having consciousness of the true and living God who hates sin?
We prevent ourselves. The revelation is still there, but in our sin we shrink back and make up lies about reality (Romans 1:20-21).
13. Why must the remedy to man's condition come by special (word) revelation?
Natural and special (word) revelation are "always coordinate" -- this was true under the Covenant of Works made with Adam, as well as under the Covenant of Grace made with the Second Adam -- "But just as the test of man's obedience came by the way of word revelation, so the remedy for man's present need comes by way of word revelation" (3).
Sunday, October 20, 2013
WCF. III. Of God's Eternal Decree - 1-2. Q & A
Blogging through and answering the questions from G. I. Williamson's The Westminster Confession of Faith for Study Classes for personal review and comprehension.
Prior posts for WCF. I. Of the Holy Scriptures - Sections 1-10.
Prior posts for WCF. II. Of God, And of the Holy Trinity - Sections 1-3.
WCF. III. Of God's Eternal Decree - 1-2.
1. What distinguishes a "person" from all other beings or things?
A person has a "will" and acts according to purpose, which distinguishes the person from other beings and impersonal things.
2. What kind of "plan" or "purpose" must of necessity belong to an "infinite, eternal, and unchangeable" personal being?
Such a "plan" or "purpose" must necessarily be infinite, eternal, and unchangeable, for it will have the attributes of the person whose "will" is at back the plan. "God is an infinite, eternal, and unchangeable Person. Therefore his plan or purpose must ever have been a part of his infinite, eternal, and unchangeable existence" (30).
3. Cite a Scripture text proving that all existence is controlled by God.
Ephesians 3:11 speaks of God's eternal purpose which He purposed - "According to the eternal purpose which he purposed in Christ Jesus our Lord." And Ephesians 1:11 speaks of God's controlling all things - "In whom also we have obtained an inheritance, being predestinated according to the purpose of him who worketh all things after the counsel of his own will."
4. Cite a Scripture text proving that the most minute details of existence are controlled by God.
Ephesians 1:11 speaks of God's controlling all things ("all" includes even the most minute details) - "In whom also we have obtained an inheritance, being predestinated according to the purpose of him who worketh all things after the counsel of his own will." Also, in Matthew 10:29, Christ says, "Are not two sparrows sold for a farthing? and one of them shall not fall on the ground without your Father."
5. Cite a text proving that seemingly accidental events are controlled by God.
The narrative in 1 Kings 22 records several seemingly accidental events which are controlled by God.
6. Cite a text proving that evil acts are predetermined by God.
In Matthew 18:7 Jesus says, "Woe unto the world because of offences! for it must needs be that offences come; but woe to that man by whom the offence cometh!" God has predetermined/predestined all events, even evil, but these acts are committed because men freely choose to do so.
7, Cite a text proving that evil acts are nevertheless "free."
Acts 2:22-23 teaches that God foreordained that Christ would be delivered for death by the rulers of Israel, but it being done on account of their wicked volition - "Ye men of Israel, hear these words; Jesus of Nazareth, a man approved of God among you by miracles and wonders and signs, which God did by him in the midst of you, as ye yourselves also know: Him, being delivered by the determinate counsel and foreknowledge of God, ye have taken, and by wicked hands have crucified and slain."
8.. Cite a text proving that "good" acts done by regenerate persons are predetermined by God, and yet also "free."
Because "will" flows from nature, the regenerate, who have been given a new nature through regeneration, are capable of freely doing "good" acts, this being taught in Matthew 7:17a - "Even so every good tree bringeth forth good fruit."
9. What do we mean when we say that a man is "free," or acts "freely"?
Man is free if "not forced by any power outside himself to do that which is contrary to 'what he wants to do'" (31).
10. Why are the unregenerate, though free, certain to do only evil?
The unregenerate are free, they have liberty, but they do not have the ability to do good because of their evil nature (due to original sin). They do not have the ability to do good because will flows from nature. As Matthew 7:18 says, "A good tree cannot bring forth evil fruit, neither can a corrupt tree bring forth good fruit."
11. Why are the regenerate, though free, certain to please God?
They are certain to please God because they have a regenerate nature (which is a gift given to them by God), thus, they have a good will "which is in accord with the will of God" (31).
12. Can God foresee (or foreknow) before he predetermines? Vice versa? Why?.
No and No. God's foreknowledge and predestination are not at odds with one another. As Williamson says, God foreknows things with certainty because God guarantees the certainty. God determines all that exists. This is the case because of the impossibility of the contrary, i.e., if it were not true then God would not be the only self-existent being.
Prior posts for WCF. I. Of the Holy Scriptures - Sections 1-10.
Prior posts for WCF. II. Of God, And of the Holy Trinity - Sections 1-3.
WCF. III. Of God's Eternal Decree - 1-2.
1. What distinguishes a "person" from all other beings or things?
A person has a "will" and acts according to purpose, which distinguishes the person from other beings and impersonal things.
2. What kind of "plan" or "purpose" must of necessity belong to an "infinite, eternal, and unchangeable" personal being?
Such a "plan" or "purpose" must necessarily be infinite, eternal, and unchangeable, for it will have the attributes of the person whose "will" is at back the plan. "God is an infinite, eternal, and unchangeable Person. Therefore his plan or purpose must ever have been a part of his infinite, eternal, and unchangeable existence" (30).
3. Cite a Scripture text proving that all existence is controlled by God.
Ephesians 3:11 speaks of God's eternal purpose which He purposed - "According to the eternal purpose which he purposed in Christ Jesus our Lord." And Ephesians 1:11 speaks of God's controlling all things - "In whom also we have obtained an inheritance, being predestinated according to the purpose of him who worketh all things after the counsel of his own will."
4. Cite a Scripture text proving that the most minute details of existence are controlled by God.
Ephesians 1:11 speaks of God's controlling all things ("all" includes even the most minute details) - "In whom also we have obtained an inheritance, being predestinated according to the purpose of him who worketh all things after the counsel of his own will." Also, in Matthew 10:29, Christ says, "Are not two sparrows sold for a farthing? and one of them shall not fall on the ground without your Father."
5. Cite a text proving that seemingly accidental events are controlled by God.
The narrative in 1 Kings 22 records several seemingly accidental events which are controlled by God.
6. Cite a text proving that evil acts are predetermined by God.
In Matthew 18:7 Jesus says, "Woe unto the world because of offences! for it must needs be that offences come; but woe to that man by whom the offence cometh!" God has predetermined/predestined all events, even evil, but these acts are committed because men freely choose to do so.
7, Cite a text proving that evil acts are nevertheless "free."
Acts 2:22-23 teaches that God foreordained that Christ would be delivered for death by the rulers of Israel, but it being done on account of their wicked volition - "Ye men of Israel, hear these words; Jesus of Nazareth, a man approved of God among you by miracles and wonders and signs, which God did by him in the midst of you, as ye yourselves also know: Him, being delivered by the determinate counsel and foreknowledge of God, ye have taken, and by wicked hands have crucified and slain."
8.. Cite a text proving that "good" acts done by regenerate persons are predetermined by God, and yet also "free."
Because "will" flows from nature, the regenerate, who have been given a new nature through regeneration, are capable of freely doing "good" acts, this being taught in Matthew 7:17a - "Even so every good tree bringeth forth good fruit."
9. What do we mean when we say that a man is "free," or acts "freely"?
Man is free if "not forced by any power outside himself to do that which is contrary to 'what he wants to do'" (31).
10. Why are the unregenerate, though free, certain to do only evil?
The unregenerate are free, they have liberty, but they do not have the ability to do good because of their evil nature (due to original sin). They do not have the ability to do good because will flows from nature. As Matthew 7:18 says, "A good tree cannot bring forth evil fruit, neither can a corrupt tree bring forth good fruit."
11. Why are the regenerate, though free, certain to please God?
They are certain to please God because they have a regenerate nature (which is a gift given to them by God), thus, they have a good will "which is in accord with the will of God" (31).
12. Can God foresee (or foreknow) before he predetermines? Vice versa? Why?.
No and No. God's foreknowledge and predestination are not at odds with one another. As Williamson says, God foreknows things with certainty because God guarantees the certainty. God determines all that exists. This is the case because of the impossibility of the contrary, i.e., if it were not true then God would not be the only self-existent being.
Monday, September 1, 2014
WCF. VI. Of the Fall of Man, of Sin, and of the Punishment Thereof - Q&A - Sections 1-6.
Blogging through and answering the questions from G. I. Williamson's The Westminster Confession of Faith for Study Classes for personal review and comprehension.
Prior posts for WCF. I. Of the Holy Scriptures - Sections 1-10.
Prior posts for WCF. II. Of God, And of the Holy Trinity - Sections 1-3.
Prior posts for WCF. III. Of God's Eternal Decree - Sections 1-8.
Prior posts for WCF. IV. Of Creation - Sections 1-2.
Prior posts for WCF. V. Of Providence - Sections 1-7.
WCF. VI. Of the Fall of Man, of Sin, and of the Punishment Thereof.
Sections 1-2.
Sections 3-4.
Sections 5-6.
Prior posts for WCF. I. Of the Holy Scriptures - Sections 1-10.
Prior posts for WCF. II. Of God, And of the Holy Trinity - Sections 1-3.
Prior posts for WCF. III. Of God's Eternal Decree - Sections 1-8.
Prior posts for WCF. IV. Of Creation - Sections 1-2.
Prior posts for WCF. V. Of Providence - Sections 1-7.
WCF. VI. Of the Fall of Man, of Sin, and of the Punishment Thereof.
Sections 1-2.
Sections 3-4.
Sections 5-6.
Friday, October 11, 2013
WCF. II. Of God, And of the Holy Trinity - Q & A - Questions 1-3.
Blogging through and answering the questions from G. I. Williamson's The Westminster Confession of Faith for Study Classes for personal review and comprehension.
Prior posts for WCF. I. Of the Holy Scriptures - Sections 1-10.
Prior posts for WCF. II. Questions 1-3.
II. Of God, And of the Holy Trinity - 1-2.
II. Of God, And of the Holy Trinity - 3.
Prior posts for WCF. I. Of the Holy Scriptures - Sections 1-10.
Prior posts for WCF. II. Questions 1-3.
II. Of God, And of the Holy Trinity - 1-2.
II. Of God, And of the Holy Trinity - 3.
Wednesday, October 30, 2013
WCF. III. Of God's Eternal Decree - 6. Q & A
Blogging through and answering the questions from G. I. Williamson's The Westminster Confession of Faith for Study Classes for personal review and comprehension.
Prior posts for WCF. I. Of the Holy Scriptures - Sections 1-10.
Prior posts for WCF. II. Of God, And of the Holy Trinity - Sections 1-3.
Prior posts WCF. III.
III. Of God's Eternal Decree - 1-2.
III. Of God's Eternal Decree - 3-5.
WCF. III. Of God's Eternal Decree - 6.
1. Read Acts 27:14-44. What divine end was promised by God (v. 24)? What means did the inspired apostle require for attaining this end (v. 31)? Was the end reached? Were the means used as required? Which then was ordained (decreed, or predetermined) by God, the end or the means?
God says in verse 24 that Paul's life will be preserved, because he must be brought to Caesar, and that the lives of "all them that sail with thee" will also be preserved. The means required for preservation were obeying the inspired Apostles command, "Except these abide in the ship, ye cannot be saved" (their lives will be preserved if they remain in the ship and obey Paul's instructions). Yes, the end was reached: verse 44 says, "And so it came to pass, that they escaped all safe to land." Both the end and the means were decreed by God. God predetermined that all would be preserved through the storm and shipwreck, and God predetermined the means would be by listening and obeying Paul's instructions.
2. What is wrong with this popular statement: "If I'm elect then I will be saved no matter what I do?"
This popular statement is wrong and foolish because it denies that God predetermines the end as well as the means, i.e., "Paul links divine predestination (the end) with calling, justification and glorification (means to this end) (Rom. 8:30)" (35). The popular statement above is wrong because it is not a fully Biblical view, since God ordains both the end and the means. In light of Romans 8:30, you cannot say you will be saved (the end) no matter what you do (the means).
3. By what is the plan of God never contradicted?
"The plan of God is never contradicted by the works of God by which the plan is executed" (35). The Godhead is in perfect harmony, therefore, the Godhead's decree (end) and executed plan (means) are in perfect harmony. Their is no contradiction within the Godhead, therefore, there is no contradiction within the Godhead's decrees.
4. Why may we not say that Christ's death was intended for the salvation of all?
Scripture says that not all men will be saved, therefore, Christ's death (the means) cannot be intended for the salvation of all.
Prior posts for WCF. I. Of the Holy Scriptures - Sections 1-10.
Prior posts for WCF. II. Of God, And of the Holy Trinity - Sections 1-3.
Prior posts WCF. III.
III. Of God's Eternal Decree - 1-2.
III. Of God's Eternal Decree - 3-5.
WCF. III. Of God's Eternal Decree - 6.
1. Read Acts 27:14-44. What divine end was promised by God (v. 24)? What means did the inspired apostle require for attaining this end (v. 31)? Was the end reached? Were the means used as required? Which then was ordained (decreed, or predetermined) by God, the end or the means?
God says in verse 24 that Paul's life will be preserved, because he must be brought to Caesar, and that the lives of "all them that sail with thee" will also be preserved. The means required for preservation were obeying the inspired Apostles command, "Except these abide in the ship, ye cannot be saved" (their lives will be preserved if they remain in the ship and obey Paul's instructions). Yes, the end was reached: verse 44 says, "And so it came to pass, that they escaped all safe to land." Both the end and the means were decreed by God. God predetermined that all would be preserved through the storm and shipwreck, and God predetermined the means would be by listening and obeying Paul's instructions.
2. What is wrong with this popular statement: "If I'm elect then I will be saved no matter what I do?"
This popular statement is wrong and foolish because it denies that God predetermines the end as well as the means, i.e., "Paul links divine predestination (the end) with calling, justification and glorification (means to this end) (Rom. 8:30)" (35). The popular statement above is wrong because it is not a fully Biblical view, since God ordains both the end and the means. In light of Romans 8:30, you cannot say you will be saved (the end) no matter what you do (the means).
3. By what is the plan of God never contradicted?
"The plan of God is never contradicted by the works of God by which the plan is executed" (35). The Godhead is in perfect harmony, therefore, the Godhead's decree (end) and executed plan (means) are in perfect harmony. Their is no contradiction within the Godhead, therefore, there is no contradiction within the Godhead's decrees.
4. Why may we not say that Christ's death was intended for the salvation of all?
Scripture says that not all men will be saved, therefore, Christ's death (the means) cannot be intended for the salvation of all.
Thursday, September 19, 2013
WCF. I. Of the Holy Scriptures - 7. Q & A
Blogging through and answering
the questions from G. I. Williamson's The Westminster Confession of Faith for Study Classes for personal review and comprehension.
I. Of the Holy Scriptures - 2-5.
I. Of the Holy Scriptures - 6.
WCF. I. Of the Holy Scriptures - 7.
Prior posts:
I. Of the Holy Scriptures - 1.I. Of the Holy Scriptures - 2-5.
I. Of the Holy Scriptures - 6.
WCF. I. Of the Holy Scriptures - 7.
1. What does
"perspicuity" of Scriptures mean?
Perspicuity is used to describe
the clarity of what Scripture teaches: Scripture is easily understood and
lucid.
2. What is the Roman Catholic
doctrine on this same point?
Roman Catholics do not agree with
Protestants on this point. They believe "We can know the true meaning [of
Scripture] . . . from the Catholic Church which has been authorized by Jesus
Christ to explain His doctrines" (Baltimore Catechism, Q. 1328). Thus, they
are saying that Scripture is not lucid, since they insist Scripture needs the
interpretive imagination of the Roman Catholic Church.
3. Contrast Roman Catholic and
Reformed views of the creed.
For the former, creeds are the
lucid interpretations provided by the Church of the unclear Scriptures. For the
latter, the "authority of creeds is determined by Scripture, not
determinative of Scripture" (13). The Reformed view is that the creeds are always subordinate to Scripture.
4. Does the doctrine of
perspicuity of Scripture teach that there is nothing difficult to understand in
Scripture? What is the difference between this admission and the Roman Catholic
teaching?
No. The doctrine of perspicuity of Scripture does not teach there is nothing difficult to understand in Scripture. There are many profound things taught in Scripture, e.g., Doctrine of Election, Doctrine of Trinity. "It is the glory of God to conceal a matter, but the glory of kings is to search out a matter" (Proverbs 25:2). These profound things are hard to understand because of the nature of their content, but they can be understood.
5. What must the humblest as well
as the most learned Christian do to understand the Scriptures? Do you think
that those who complain of Scripture being too hard to understand have ever
really done this?
All must study the Scriptures in order to understand the Scriptures. This is a diligent work. It is not something that is accomplished with "spasmodic spurts of effort" (13). If you read Scripture diligently and cumulatively, then you cannot say it is too hard to understand.
6. How does Scripture itself
indicate that God regards his Word as clear enough for all to understand?
God tells us to search and study and read the Scriptures, and God' s Word is addressed to all men.
2 Timothy 3:15-17 "And that from a child thou hast known the holy scriptures, which are able to make thee wise unto salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus. All Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: that the man of God may be perfect, thoroughly furnished unto all good works."
Acts 17:11 "These were more noble than those in Thessalonica, in that they received the word with all readiness of mind, and searched the scriptures daily, whether those things were so."
John 5:39 "Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me."
Deuteronomy 6:4-9 "Hear, O Israel: The Lord our God is one Lord: and thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thine heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy might. And these words, which I command thee this day, shall be in thine heart: and thou shalt teach them diligently unto thy children, and shalt talk of them when thou sittest in thine house, and when thou walkest by the way, and when thou liest down, and when thou risest up. And thou shalt bind them for a sign upon thine hand, and they shall be as frontlets between thine eyes. And thou shalt write them upon the posts of thy house, and on thy gates."
7. What would you believe are
"the ordinary means" which must be duly used?
Study the Bible in a systematic fashion with aids (pastoral help, the creeds, Bible commentaries, Christian devotional writings, etc.).
Tuesday, September 17, 2013
WCF. I. Of the Holy Scriptures - 2-5. Q & A
Blogging through the questions from G. I. Williamson's The Westminster Confession of Faith for Study Classes.
Prior post: I. Of the Holy Scriptures - 1.
WCF. I. Of the Holy Scriptures - 2-5.
1. What is the "proof" that the Bible is inspired?
Evidence both internal and external to God's Word is "proof" that the Bible is inspired. The internal evidence claims it is the Word of God, the New Testament authors believed the Old Testament was inspired, Jesus Christ promised to give his Holy Scripture to his disciples in order to write the New Testament Scriptures (see John 14:26), within the New Testament we see that the different authors treat each others writings as the inspired Word of God, the Bible contains information that could only be revealed (e.g., Creation, the future new heaven and new earth), in addition, the Bible contains many prophesies that were fulfilled. The "external evidence is subordinate, but important" (7): the Church in all ages has acknowledge Scripture as inspired, and the Scriptures have "been preserved as no other writing on earth" (7), indicating God's special care.
2. How does the Bible express the claim that it is inspired?
The Bible claims to be the word of God. The Bible claims God is its author.
3. Why cannot the authority of the Bible depend on the "testimony" of any man or Church?
The authority of the Bible cannot depend on the "testimony" of any man or Church because both can and oftentimes err. "Yet it is no small thing that the Church even in its darkest days has acknowledged that the Bible is the Word of God" (7).
4. What is Rome's audacious claim?
Rome's audacious claim is that the the Bible is the Word of God, but that this certainty depends upon the testimony of the Church. (See the Baltimore Catechism, Q. 1327: "it is only from Tradition (preserved in the Catholic Church) that we can know which of the writings of ancient times are inspired and which are not inspired.")
5. How do Protestants sometimes subordinate the authority of Scripture to men?
This occurs when Protestants foolishly grant or give credence to the unbeliever's claim that there is nothing within Scripture that warrants them to believe it is the Word of God. That is, when Protestants grant that there is a "neutral" starting point from which to dive into the complex web of data (i.e., archaeological, historical, etc.) and attempt to sift through the facts and arrive at the truth of the matter. This is foolishness because it is idolatrous, it makes the reason of man the measure of all things.
6. Where must the evidence of Scripture's divinity be sought?
The evidence must be sought in the Divine-Word; the evidence is evident in the intrinsic qualities. The Word of God is there. It is and in it are the evidences of its divinity. "As Prof. John Murray puts it: 'The authority of Scripture is an objective and permanent fact residing in the quality of inspiration'"(8).
7. If the evidence is there, why does not faith always result when men are confronted with that evidence?
There is no deficiency in the evidence, so the reasons faith does not always result when men are confronted with the evidence is because "not all men have the requisite perceptive faculty" (8). What is the state of the man's heart? If they hate God, if the grace of God is not active in their heart, then their understanding is darkened by bondage to sin. The truth (evidence) is there, but they attempt to hold it down and suppress it (see Romans 1:18).
8. When the Confession speaks of the Holy Spirit "bearing witness," does it mean that the new truth conveyed to the mind?
No. The Holy Spirit is not conveying new truth to the mind of man. The Holy Spirit "bearing witness" does so "by and with the word in our hearts." There is both the objective witness of Scripture and the internal testimony of the Holy Spirit, and man through the internal work of the Holy Spirit responds appropriately to the truth that is the objective witness of Scripture. The truth in the Bible is the truth conveyed to the mind of believers through the work of the Holy Spirit. "God's whole truth to man is contained in Scripture" (8). The Word of God is inherently perfect, therefore, the Holy Spirit does not convey new truth to the mind of man.
Prior post: I. Of the Holy Scriptures - 1.
WCF. I. Of the Holy Scriptures - 2-5.
1. What is the "proof" that the Bible is inspired?
Evidence both internal and external to God's Word is "proof" that the Bible is inspired. The internal evidence claims it is the Word of God, the New Testament authors believed the Old Testament was inspired, Jesus Christ promised to give his Holy Scripture to his disciples in order to write the New Testament Scriptures (see John 14:26), within the New Testament we see that the different authors treat each others writings as the inspired Word of God, the Bible contains information that could only be revealed (e.g., Creation, the future new heaven and new earth), in addition, the Bible contains many prophesies that were fulfilled. The "external evidence is subordinate, but important" (7): the Church in all ages has acknowledge Scripture as inspired, and the Scriptures have "been preserved as no other writing on earth" (7), indicating God's special care.
2. How does the Bible express the claim that it is inspired?
The Bible claims to be the word of God. The Bible claims God is its author.
3. Why cannot the authority of the Bible depend on the "testimony" of any man or Church?
The authority of the Bible cannot depend on the "testimony" of any man or Church because both can and oftentimes err. "Yet it is no small thing that the Church even in its darkest days has acknowledged that the Bible is the Word of God" (7).
4. What is Rome's audacious claim?
Rome's audacious claim is that the the Bible is the Word of God, but that this certainty depends upon the testimony of the Church. (See the Baltimore Catechism, Q. 1327: "it is only from Tradition (preserved in the Catholic Church) that we can know which of the writings of ancient times are inspired and which are not inspired.")
5. How do Protestants sometimes subordinate the authority of Scripture to men?
This occurs when Protestants foolishly grant or give credence to the unbeliever's claim that there is nothing within Scripture that warrants them to believe it is the Word of God. That is, when Protestants grant that there is a "neutral" starting point from which to dive into the complex web of data (i.e., archaeological, historical, etc.) and attempt to sift through the facts and arrive at the truth of the matter. This is foolishness because it is idolatrous, it makes the reason of man the measure of all things.
6. Where must the evidence of Scripture's divinity be sought?
The evidence must be sought in the Divine-Word; the evidence is evident in the intrinsic qualities. The Word of God is there. It is and in it are the evidences of its divinity. "As Prof. John Murray puts it: 'The authority of Scripture is an objective and permanent fact residing in the quality of inspiration'"(8).
7. If the evidence is there, why does not faith always result when men are confronted with that evidence?
There is no deficiency in the evidence, so the reasons faith does not always result when men are confronted with the evidence is because "not all men have the requisite perceptive faculty" (8). What is the state of the man's heart? If they hate God, if the grace of God is not active in their heart, then their understanding is darkened by bondage to sin. The truth (evidence) is there, but they attempt to hold it down and suppress it (see Romans 1:18).
8. When the Confession speaks of the Holy Spirit "bearing witness," does it mean that the new truth conveyed to the mind?
No. The Holy Spirit is not conveying new truth to the mind of man. The Holy Spirit "bearing witness" does so "by and with the word in our hearts." There is both the objective witness of Scripture and the internal testimony of the Holy Spirit, and man through the internal work of the Holy Spirit responds appropriately to the truth that is the objective witness of Scripture. The truth in the Bible is the truth conveyed to the mind of believers through the work of the Holy Spirit. "God's whole truth to man is contained in Scripture" (8). The Word of God is inherently perfect, therefore, the Holy Spirit does not convey new truth to the mind of man.
Friday, April 18, 2014
WCF. V. Of Providence - 2-7. Q & A.
Blogging through and answering the questions from G. I. Williamson's The Westminster Confession of Faith for Study Classes for personal review and comprehension.
Prior posts for WCF. I. Of the Holy Scriptures - Sections 1-10.
Prior posts for WCF. II. Of God, And of the Holy Trinity - Sections 1-3.
Prior posts for WCF. III. Of God's Eternal Decree - Sections 1-8.
Prior posts for WCF. IV. Of Creation - Sections 1-2.
Prior post for WCF. V. Of Providence - Sections 1.
WCF. V. Of Providence. Sections 2-7.
1. Name the common objections to the doctrine of absolute sovereignty.
It is argued that if God is absolutely and exhaustively sovereign, then that means that man is not responsible for his sins.
2. Refute same.
Scripture emphatically teaches that man sins precisely because man wills to do so. Man has genuine free will, however, it is not philosophic "libertarian" free will (because there is no such thing). Man's free will is the free will of a "creature", we have freedom within the confines of a created-thing's opportunity and ability. Precisely because of the Creator-creature distinction, the Triune God, who is infinite, eternal, and immutable, allows man to do as he wills, i.e., desires/intends/chooses, as a means for rendering all that God in his providence has predetermined, i.e., "Although in relation to the foreknowledge and decree of God, the first cause, all things come to pass immutably and infallibly, yet, by the same providence, he ordereth them to fall out according to the nature of second causes, either necessarily, freely, or contingently" (WCF. V. 2.).
3. Why do the elect sometimes sin so grievously?
For a variety of reasons: as chastisement for former sins; to reveal to the elect the fierceness of sin's power; as illumination contributing to their ongoing sanctification, through revealing and enlightening the elect of deceit hidden in the dark corners of one's own heart; chiefly--to cultivate humility in them, that they might draw nearer to Jesus as the author and finisher of their faith, the Captain of their salvation. Also, falling into grievous sin teaches the elect to be on their guard, to be more watchful, to ensure that they not give Satan so much as a single wooden peg to perch upon within their hearts (seeing that the enemy oftentimes schemes to migrate sinners from lesser to greater sins). Certainly there is a plethora of "sundry other just and holy ends" (WCF. V. 5), but it would be impossible to denote them. We must be content with God's Word alone: Romans 8:28, "And we know that all things work together for good to them that love God, to them who are the called according to his purpose."
4. Why do the reprobate sometimes act better than we might expect them to?
"Because God sometimes enables the conscience of the unbeliever to overrule him" (358). The imago Dei was only defaced by the Fall, therefore, even in unbelievers there are "remnants of their old nature" (tracing back to the sinless nature of Adam). "The conscience still retains some recollection of the law of God which was written there in the beginning (Rom. 2:14-15)" (67).
5. Is it correct to speak of a Christian as both an old and new man?
Absolutely not. A Christian was the "old man" but is now the "new man." There are, however, sinful effects of the nature of the old man that a Christian must be guarded against until his death and consummation of Eternal Life. This is why mortification and quickening of the Spirit is so important for Christian Living.
6. Is a Christian "responsible" for the sin he does under the influence of "the remnants of the old nature"?
Yes. Absolutely. The new man sins, but the source of the sin is not from the new man, but, as said above, the effects of the nature of the old man. "The regenerate man sins, but he cannot give himself to the willful and continual practice of sin: 'For His [God's] seed remains in him; and he cannot sin, because he has been born of God' (1 John 3:9)" (66).
8. Explain and harmonize Paul's statements in Romans 7:20 and 7:24.
Romans 7:20, "Now if I do that I would not, it is no more I that do it, but sin that dwelleth in me." Paul traces source of sin to the remnant-effect of former sinful nature.
Romans 7:24, "O wretched man that I am! who shall deliver me from the body of this death?" Paul clearly believes he himself is responsible for his own sinful actions.
9. Why is the final section of this chapter of the Confession important?
The final section is Section 7: "As the providence of God doth, in general, reach to all creatures; so, after a most special manner, it taketh care of his Church, and disposeth all things to the good thereof." Here we learn that God's providence in a special way is concerned with God's redemptive aims (cf. Rom. 8:28; Eph. 3:11).
Prior posts for WCF. I. Of the Holy Scriptures - Sections 1-10.
Prior posts for WCF. II. Of God, And of the Holy Trinity - Sections 1-3.
Prior posts for WCF. III. Of God's Eternal Decree - Sections 1-8.
Prior posts for WCF. IV. Of Creation - Sections 1-2.
Prior post for WCF. V. Of Providence - Sections 1.
WCF. V. Of Providence. Sections 2-7.
1. Name the common objections to the doctrine of absolute sovereignty.
It is argued that if God is absolutely and exhaustively sovereign, then that means that man is not responsible for his sins.
2. Refute same.
Scripture emphatically teaches that man sins precisely because man wills to do so. Man has genuine free will, however, it is not philosophic "libertarian" free will (because there is no such thing). Man's free will is the free will of a "creature", we have freedom within the confines of a created-thing's opportunity and ability. Precisely because of the Creator-creature distinction, the Triune God, who is infinite, eternal, and immutable, allows man to do as he wills, i.e., desires/intends/chooses, as a means for rendering all that God in his providence has predetermined, i.e., "Although in relation to the foreknowledge and decree of God, the first cause, all things come to pass immutably and infallibly, yet, by the same providence, he ordereth them to fall out according to the nature of second causes, either necessarily, freely, or contingently" (WCF. V. 2.).
3. Why do the elect sometimes sin so grievously?
For a variety of reasons: as chastisement for former sins; to reveal to the elect the fierceness of sin's power; as illumination contributing to their ongoing sanctification, through revealing and enlightening the elect of deceit hidden in the dark corners of one's own heart; chiefly--to cultivate humility in them, that they might draw nearer to Jesus as the author and finisher of their faith, the Captain of their salvation. Also, falling into grievous sin teaches the elect to be on their guard, to be more watchful, to ensure that they not give Satan so much as a single wooden peg to perch upon within their hearts (seeing that the enemy oftentimes schemes to migrate sinners from lesser to greater sins). Certainly there is a plethora of "sundry other just and holy ends" (WCF. V. 5), but it would be impossible to denote them. We must be content with God's Word alone: Romans 8:28, "And we know that all things work together for good to them that love God, to them who are the called according to his purpose."
4. Why do the reprobate sometimes act better than we might expect them to?
"Because God sometimes enables the conscience of the unbeliever to overrule him" (358). The imago Dei was only defaced by the Fall, therefore, even in unbelievers there are "remnants of their old nature" (tracing back to the sinless nature of Adam). "The conscience still retains some recollection of the law of God which was written there in the beginning (Rom. 2:14-15)" (67).
5. Is it correct to speak of a Christian as both an old and new man?
Absolutely not. A Christian was the "old man" but is now the "new man." There are, however, sinful effects of the nature of the old man that a Christian must be guarded against until his death and consummation of Eternal Life. This is why mortification and quickening of the Spirit is so important for Christian Living.
6. Is a Christian "responsible" for the sin he does under the influence of "the remnants of the old nature"?
Yes. Absolutely. The new man sins, but the source of the sin is not from the new man, but, as said above, the effects of the nature of the old man. "The regenerate man sins, but he cannot give himself to the willful and continual practice of sin: 'For His [God's] seed remains in him; and he cannot sin, because he has been born of God' (1 John 3:9)" (66).
8. Explain and harmonize Paul's statements in Romans 7:20 and 7:24.
Romans 7:20, "Now if I do that I would not, it is no more I that do it, but sin that dwelleth in me." Paul traces source of sin to the remnant-effect of former sinful nature.
Romans 7:24, "O wretched man that I am! who shall deliver me from the body of this death?" Paul clearly believes he himself is responsible for his own sinful actions.
9. Why is the final section of this chapter of the Confession important?
The final section is Section 7: "As the providence of God doth, in general, reach to all creatures; so, after a most special manner, it taketh care of his Church, and disposeth all things to the good thereof." Here we learn that God's providence in a special way is concerned with God's redemptive aims (cf. Rom. 8:28; Eph. 3:11).
Tuesday, August 12, 2014
WCF. V. Of Providence - Q&A - Sections 1-7.
Blogging through and answering the questions from G. I. Williamson's The Westminster Confession of Faith for Study Classes for personal review and comprehension.
Prior posts for WCF. I. Of the Holy Scriptures - Sections 1-10.
Prior posts for WCF. II. Of God, And of the Holy Trinity - Sections 1-3.
Prior posts for WCF. III. Of God's Eternal Decree - Sections 1-8.
Prior posts for WCF. IV. Of Creation - Sections 1-2.
Prior posts for WCF. V. Questions 1-7.
V. Of Providence - 1.
V. Of Providence - 2-7.
Prior posts for WCF. I. Of the Holy Scriptures - Sections 1-10.
Prior posts for WCF. II. Of God, And of the Holy Trinity - Sections 1-3.
Prior posts for WCF. III. Of God's Eternal Decree - Sections 1-8.
Prior posts for WCF. IV. Of Creation - Sections 1-2.
Prior posts for WCF. V. Questions 1-7.
V. Of Providence - 1.
V. Of Providence - 2-7.
Monday, February 16, 2015
WCF. VII. Of God's Covenant with Man - 2-3. Q & A
Blogging through and answering the questions from G. I. Williamson's The Westminster Confession of Faith for Study Classes for personal review and comprehension.
Prior posts for WCF. I. Of the Holy Scriptures - Sections 1-10.
Prior posts for WCF. II. Of God, And of the Holy Trinity - Sections 1-3.
Prior posts for WCF. III. Of God's Eternal Decree - Sections 1-8.
Prior posts for WCF. IV. Of Creation - Sections 1-2.
Prior posts for WCF. V. Of Providence - Sections 1-7.
Prior posts for WCF. VI. Of the Fall of Man, of Sin, and of the Punishment Thereof - Sections 1-6.
Prior post for WCF. VII. of God's Covenant with Man - Section 1.
WCF. VII. Of God's Covenant with Man.
Sections 2-3.
1. Why is it proper to speak of the "covenant of works" as a biblical teaching though it is not technically designated as such in Scripture?
It is proper because it is clearly implied in Genesis 2:17, as well as the hypothetical situation raised by Paul in Galatians 3:12, that man in Eden had "the alternative of obedience and life, or disobedience and death" (84).
2. What reasons are given by those who object to speaking of a covenant of works?
It is generally objected for two reasons: first, that it is not formally stated in Scripture (in a syntactical sense), and, second, that this erroneously suggest that the work's of a man would merit (read: necessitate) the blessings of God.
3. What answers may be given to these arguments?
The first argument is not convincing because a great deal of orthodox Christian belief is not "formally stated in Scripture", e.g., the doctrine of the Trinity. The second argument is not convincing because the "Confession carefully guards against the very danger that is being warned about" (84); the terminology of the former covenant (covenant of works) is used to distinguish it from the latter covenant (covenant of grace). Both covenants were sovereignly imposed by God, but the conditions in the former were the obedient works of man, but the latter is not a covenant between God and man, it is a covenant between the persons of the Godhead (a covenant between mutual parties, oftentimes called a parity covenant).
4. What merit has this designation (covenant of works)?
As stated above, the obedient works of man were the conditions (means for) the gracious provisions (covenantal promises).
5. What is meant by saying that the covenant was sovereignly imposed?
God consults Himself and nothing else.
6. State the Arminian conception of the condition of the covenant of grace.
The Arminian conception of the condition of the covenant of grace teaches that Jesus died for all men, i.e., "procured their removal from the covenant of works and introduced them into the provisions of the covenant of grace." In this new arena, salvation is made possible... man can attain eternal life on a "new and easier basis than that of the covenant of works." Why put it that way? Because, according to the former covenant, God required absolute, perfect obedience, but now God requires an abridged version of obedience--faith, repentance, and evangelical obedience. Like the former covenant, rewards and provisions are conferred upon the basis of man's works, but only because Jesus has made this a possibility. Note: salvation according to the Arminian conception is not really a gift of a parity covenant of grace between the persons of the Godhead.
7. State the Reformed conception of the condition of the covenant of grace.
The Reformed conception is that all of the conditions of the parity covenant of grace between the persons of the Godhead are fulfilled explicitly and solely by God! Thus, "the life and salvation offered sinners in the Reformed version of the gospel is actual, because it depends upon God alone not only for the end to be attained, but also for the creation of those attitudes and actions in us that are necessary for receiving of that end" (85). The conditions of the covenant of grace are "conditional only in the sense that it depends upon certain effects of the work of the holy Spirit in the hearts of God's elect," i.e., regeneration, sanctification, etc.
Note the key difference between the two: the Arminian conception of God's plan of salvation for man is merely a possibility, while the Reformed conception of God's plan of salvation for man is an actuality.
Prior posts for WCF. I. Of the Holy Scriptures - Sections 1-10.
Prior posts for WCF. II. Of God, And of the Holy Trinity - Sections 1-3.
Prior posts for WCF. III. Of God's Eternal Decree - Sections 1-8.
Prior posts for WCF. IV. Of Creation - Sections 1-2.
Prior posts for WCF. V. Of Providence - Sections 1-7.
Prior posts for WCF. VI. Of the Fall of Man, of Sin, and of the Punishment Thereof - Sections 1-6.
Prior post for WCF. VII. of God's Covenant with Man - Section 1.
WCF. VII. Of God's Covenant with Man.
Sections 2-3.
1. Why is it proper to speak of the "covenant of works" as a biblical teaching though it is not technically designated as such in Scripture?
It is proper because it is clearly implied in Genesis 2:17, as well as the hypothetical situation raised by Paul in Galatians 3:12, that man in Eden had "the alternative of obedience and life, or disobedience and death" (84).
2. What reasons are given by those who object to speaking of a covenant of works?
It is generally objected for two reasons: first, that it is not formally stated in Scripture (in a syntactical sense), and, second, that this erroneously suggest that the work's of a man would merit (read: necessitate) the blessings of God.
3. What answers may be given to these arguments?
The first argument is not convincing because a great deal of orthodox Christian belief is not "formally stated in Scripture", e.g., the doctrine of the Trinity. The second argument is not convincing because the "Confession carefully guards against the very danger that is being warned about" (84); the terminology of the former covenant (covenant of works) is used to distinguish it from the latter covenant (covenant of grace). Both covenants were sovereignly imposed by God, but the conditions in the former were the obedient works of man, but the latter is not a covenant between God and man, it is a covenant between the persons of the Godhead (a covenant between mutual parties, oftentimes called a parity covenant).
4. What merit has this designation (covenant of works)?
As stated above, the obedient works of man were the conditions (means for) the gracious provisions (covenantal promises).
5. What is meant by saying that the covenant was sovereignly imposed?
God consults Himself and nothing else.
6. State the Arminian conception of the condition of the covenant of grace.
The Arminian conception of the condition of the covenant of grace teaches that Jesus died for all men, i.e., "procured their removal from the covenant of works and introduced them into the provisions of the covenant of grace." In this new arena, salvation is made possible... man can attain eternal life on a "new and easier basis than that of the covenant of works." Why put it that way? Because, according to the former covenant, God required absolute, perfect obedience, but now God requires an abridged version of obedience--faith, repentance, and evangelical obedience. Like the former covenant, rewards and provisions are conferred upon the basis of man's works, but only because Jesus has made this a possibility. Note: salvation according to the Arminian conception is not really a gift of a parity covenant of grace between the persons of the Godhead.
7. State the Reformed conception of the condition of the covenant of grace.
The Reformed conception is that all of the conditions of the parity covenant of grace between the persons of the Godhead are fulfilled explicitly and solely by God! Thus, "the life and salvation offered sinners in the Reformed version of the gospel is actual, because it depends upon God alone not only for the end to be attained, but also for the creation of those attitudes and actions in us that are necessary for receiving of that end" (85). The conditions of the covenant of grace are "conditional only in the sense that it depends upon certain effects of the work of the holy Spirit in the hearts of God's elect," i.e., regeneration, sanctification, etc.
Note the key difference between the two: the Arminian conception of God's plan of salvation for man is merely a possibility, while the Reformed conception of God's plan of salvation for man is an actuality.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)